Alternative Access Resources & Clear Communication

 

1977 CDC vaccination campaign poster

On Thursday night I signal boosted that CDC scientists aren't in control of public-facing websites ahead of the Friday news that RFK Jr. says he personally directed CDC's new guidance on vaccines and autism. My heart goes out to the 5 staffers contributing to "Embarrassing" and "Horrifying": CDC Workers Describe the New Vaccines and Autism Page. It's also worth reading the opinion of We are former CDC officials. RFK Jr.s change to vaccine guidance is propaganda. Personally, I prefer almost 50-year-old Star Wars CDC information about vaccines instead of this current malarky. 

I've been saying this since August; Can we in good faith still promote US government-produced health resources as the "best available information"?  Since September the warning signals were clear as everyone from the former Surgeons General to the World Health Organization were calling for CDC's protection, and now here we are. 

I also promised to share more about my Pacific Northwest Chapter of the Medical Library Association November 6 presentation (I requested no recording). Back then I didn't know if I'd still be employed after January 15th (I'm now employed until July 15th), and I made it clear that I was speaking not as a representative of any of my former or current job positions/organizations, but 100% as the obnoxious smartass opinionated straight talker I am.  

The truth is I've already shared most of what I said there over here for months, just distilled it into 10 minutes of tips & tools. I'll batch this entry together the same way I did then though, and there are a few updates along the way along with 2 clear public health communication resources to counter last week's 'guidance.'

Alternative Access Resources

My guess is most of you already know and use these resources by now. In my presentation I included my teaching language, why we need to keep centering populations who are missing from resources now, and an emphasis on shifting gears from national .govs directly to trusted local, tribal, county/state health and professional organizations for health information. 

Archive.org - for snapshots of websites over time, pop a URL in and see what info it used to have

• archive.org   

MedlinePlus Population Groups (I had a lot to say about this in June)

• MedlinePlus Population Groups - January via archive.org
• MedlinePlus Population Groups  - Current

NNLM Equity, Diversity & Inclusion Guide - gone but not forgotten

• Guide via archive.org 

Another Way - thanks Erika! 

• The Xed Files, Medicine@Brown, October 15, 2025  

Alternative Access Resources - non-partisan entry points

• Alternative Data Sources  
• Govarchive.us 

Think Topically - need suggestions on the trusted organizations? Here's some to start from

• Vaccine Education Center from Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP)
• Every Stage Health from the American College of Obstetricians & Gynecologists (ACOG)
• Infectious Diseases from the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases (NFID)
  
  

PubMed? (the what-ifs in June & continuing in September, getting real needs to start now) 

• LSTRC for MEDLINE terminated 
• OLSPub (the initial project didn't receive funding, another proposal has been submitted)
• Hilda Bastian & Tracking Shutdown Impact and Changes at PubMed, October 10, 2025 

Clear Communication

I have learned so much from 5 years of public health workforce training development work, especially these really valuable communication resources that are focused on current trending and/or hot health topics.

Librarians and public health communicators have identical goals: Communicating clearly about unbiased health information in plain language. Please consider referencing them frequently now & in the time ahead - they will not deviate from real science and evidence-based resources.

Public Health Communications Collaborative 

• CDC webpage update includes false autism claims, fueling confusion (Nov 19, high impact)
• Trending - for other hot topics as they emerge with suggested communication guidance

 Infodemiology 

• CDC updates webpage to include false autism claims, fueling confusion (Nov 20, scroll down for talking points)
• Infodemiology - also for hot topics including dashboards

 FrameWorks 

• Boosting Public Discourse: Reframing Childhood Immunization toolkit
• Our Resources/Issues/Health - loads of other research-based framing
• Framing Fundamentals - I can be extremely snarky, and I am learning in these times that the choices I make in what I say and how I say it make a significant difference. My goal is for that to be for a greater good even when it's much easier to snark. 

CDC: "And we persist, goddammit"

Hard day today Here's what we think about trusting CDC

[image or embed]

— Alt CDC (they/them) (@altcdc.altgov.info) November 20, 2025 at 5:24 PM 

tl;dr bullet points, bold my own emphasis  

Bluesky's verified #AltGov labeler/#AltGov starter pack is helpful alternative communication.

More about that in my October 12 post

CDC's scientists aren't in control of public-facing CDC websites.

"Don't treat them [CDC websites] as the gold standard" 

"Corroborate the information with other trusted, independent sources"

CDC's scientists are still there and still sciencing.

Exhibit A MMWR November 20, 2025 / 74(37);580–588 (legit science!) 

Exhibit B MMWR November 20, 2025 / 74(37);589–591 (also legit science!)

Vaccines do not cause autism

"Other trusted, independent sources": Can't go wrong with the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia! 

The agency this week quietly changed its official language to suggest vaccines may cause autism, a claim that scientists say has no basis in evidence

[image or embed]

— Scientific American (@sciam.bsky.social) November 20, 2025 at 8:21 AM

Gender-affirming care improves mental health and saves lives

"Other trusted, independent sources": Alt CDC pointed to University of Washington's School of Public Health as a source linking to real evidence-based research.

HHS leaders are doubling down on harm. Their new “report” on gender-affirming care for minors is junk science. Skip it. Check this out instead: sph.washington.edu/news-events/... It links to real evidence-based research Bottom line: Gender-affirming care improves mental health and saves lives 🏳️‍⚧️🫶🏳️‍⚧️

[image or embed]

— Alt CDC (they/them) (@altcdc.altgov.info) November 20, 2025 at 2:37 PM

Upstream Opportunities: Alternative Access Resources & Clear Communication

More next week about other trusted, independent sources and communication strategies. If you were there when I opened my mouth on November 6 and did not script any of what flew out of it, you can skip it because you already know what I had to say and got a handout with all my sources. 

SNAP Back Against Hunger

 

Fall vegetarian potluck scene at work last week

Since Food benefits set to expire for 41 million people as US shutdown continues, take action - 

• Find Your Local Food Bank - if you are in need or in plenty with funds to share
• Find Your Local Mini Pantry - if you are in need or in plenty with non-perishables to share
• Please check Little Free Food Pantry Food Safety Information before sharing food

Special thank you to Furloughed feds pick up Seattle beach trash to keep serving the public. 

CDC: No library, dangerous data, bad actor

Now, federal health agencies, universities, health systems and the communities we serve are in peril. We must ask ourselves: are we willing to address the power structures that jeopardize public health and produce health inequities?*

Edit: slight update, still caution

Small win: #CDC privacy office survived the weekend chaos. Big concerns remain about how HHS, Palantir & others may use STLT data. If agencies must share, we recommend the bare minimum—aggregate if possible—and use high caution and good judgement to protect residents against unsanctioned data use.

[image or embed]

— Alt CDC (they/them) (@altcdc.altgov.info) October 13, 2025 at 9:01 AM

tl;dr bullet points - 

• The CDC library was fired Friday (source)
• Safeguards for data protection at CDC have been removed (source, read thread)
• Bluesky's verified #AltGov labeler/#AltGov starter pack is helpful alternative communication

I'm not sure any of us can keep up with the rapid pace of changes since Friday night when Trump Administration Lays Off Dozens of C.D.C Officials (gift link), then CDC walks back hundreds of firings as US shutdown persists.

The latter article indicates CDC library firing was not reversed, which aligns with information on Friday from the @AltCDC account on Blusky - 

RIFed: Office of Science - CDC Library They have helped SO many of us with their expertise & guidance so we can do efficient & quick research. You don’t need us toiling in Pubmed for days at a time during an outbreak. The library helps us get what we need quickly so we can continue our work.

[image or embed]

— Alt CDC (they/them) (@altcdc.altgov.info) October 10, 2025 at 7:01 PM

This was pinned as a top notice on their account today (Sunday): 

⚠️ STATES, LOCALS, TRIBAL NATIONS, TERRITORIES ⚠️ HHS has eliminated EVERY SINGLE SAFEGUARD FOR DATA PROTECTION AT CDC. Giving data to CDC is no longer safe and puts your residents at risk. Unless and until all CDC’s data protections are restored you should consider CDC a bad actor.

— Alt CDC (they/them) (@altcdc.altgov.info) October 12, 2025 at 10:03 AM

Click through to see the thread for specifics, such as a recommendation to keep protected health information (PHI) to local levels and reporting data summaries.

I understand if you are skeptical about an individual account on Blusky serving as a legitimate alternative communication channel for information.

What is not visible via an embed is this verified #altgov badge between the account and message though: 

 

The Verified #AltGov labeler of the #AltGov starter pack (vetted & verified accounts, more about the #AltGov accounts) is one I highly recommend if you are on Blusky. So many dedicated workers from within/adjacent to the federal government are doing their best to keep communicating with the public even as their official communication channels are maligned or terminated, and it's on us to seek out & amplify their message. I really hope I can include a future edit above my tl;dr line here that CDC data safeguards are in place again, but documenting where things are at in this point in time is necessary.

In solidarity with really awesome public health colleagues asking us to address power structures, again I ask: Can we in good faith still promote US government-produced health resources as the "best available information"? 

*https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2617-7085 Caitlin L. McMurtry et al. “Why Building Power Is Key to Protecting Academic Public Health and Advancing Health Equity”, American Journal of Public Health 115, no. 11 (November 1, 2025): pp. 1783-1788. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2025.308210 PMID: 41061214

MEDLINE: From Committee to Consultants

As I shared on June 16, I've been concerned about the PubMed database of biomedical and life sciences literature this year. I didn't explicitly say MEDLINE, the primary indexed biomedical sciences component of PubMed, but perhaps I should have. 

There was a Technical Bulletin on September 8 about MEDLINE selection that I followed to learn more, and saw that the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee (LSTRC, a National Library of Medicine advisory committee since 1987) was terminated this year.  

Here's what was there on July 25 for the Journal Selection for MEDLINE.

I underlined below who made the final decision about MEDLINE journal indexing: 

 ... as well as the recommendations of an NIH Federal Advisory Committee, the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee (LSTRC).

The LSTRC consists of fifteen members, including scientists (i.e., Ph.D.- or M.D.-level researchers and physicians) and medical librarians. The LSTRC generally reviews articles from the last two years of journal content and evaluates them primarily based on scientific and editorial quality.

MEDLINE’s Scientific Quality Review is a rigorous, multi-step process in which many factors are assessed. NLM views each journal comprehensively, rather than basing a decision on a defined list of criteria. Each title is reviewed by multiple individuals both within the NLM and the LSTRC, and final decisions are based on input from all these sources. The final decision of whether to index a journal for MEDLINE is made by the Director of the NLM.  

Here's what's the Journal Selection for MEDLINE description is now (September 21). I underlined some observed differences where LSTRC-related information used to be in the July 25 version. 

It is now not stated exactly who makes the final decision about MEDLINE journal indexing, and the consultants' recommendations line is new:

...as well as the recommendations of external, expert consultants

At least two consultants, usually one scientist (i.e., doctoral-level researchers or physicians) and one medical librarian review each journal. The consultants generally review articles from the last two years of journal content and evaluate them primarily based on scientific and editorial quality. Their recommendations are taken into consideration by NLM in reaching a final decision on selecting a title for inclusion in MEDLINE.

MEDLINE’s Scientific Quality Review is a rigorous, multi-step process in which many factors are assessed. NLM views each journal comprehensively, rather than basing a decision on a defined list of criteria. Each title is reviewed by multiple individuals both internal and external to NLM, and final decisions are based on input from all these sources.

Some additional concerns about publishing the past few days include news headlines of

• September 18: DOJ Deletes Study Alleging Rise in Far-Right Terrorism in US.*
• September 20: EPA tells scientists to stop publishing studies, employees say. 

There are still spaces available to register for the English update on September 25 at 9:00 am Pacific time of the European OLSPub project, an alternative to PubMed that I'd encourage medical librarians to check out. 

*Chermak, S., Demichele, M., Gruenewald, J., Jensen, M., Lewis, R., & Lopez, B. E. (2024). What NIJ research tells us about domestic terrorism. National Institute of Justice. 
https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/what-nij-research-tells-us-about-domestic-terrorism [with Internet Archive link to content]

Public health: "It’s truly a matter of life and death"

 

Faculty lead & program manager a lifetime ago (January 2020)

I often describe November 2019 - January 2024 as 'I worked for the School of Public Health for 5 years then came back to the Health Sciences Library as their librarian,' but that summary can never do justice to that time & certainly not to my phenomenal colleagues. 

We did amazing work. I can't remember what was so funny on this day when we launched it. We certainly had no idea what was about to happen to everyday life as we knew it. We kept the program going throughout 2020 & 2021 in a virtual pivot, then in hybrid yearly cohorts supportive of where our scholars were at & improving to the best of our ability and resources based on evaluation feedback. 

Our faculty lead back then is now our State Health Officer (previously Chief Science Officer) who signed a standing order for all of Washington, in break with FDA rules, acts to assure wide access to COVID-19 vaccines last week. He notes, "COVID-19 vaccines are well-researched, well-tested, and have saved millions of lives around the world." 

That resulted in his national time with Rachel Maddow Tuesday! We are so lucky to have him & the rest of our solidly scientific evidence-based team at the helm of our state's department of health, and on Thursday our insurance announced their COVID-19 vaccine coverage at no cost too.

Last week also had the Surgeons general warning: CDC saves lives. It's up to us to save public health that included this blog post title. 

They caution "As former surgeons general, we took an oath to protect the health of the American people. This includes speaking out when the public’s health is in danger ‒ even when doing so is uncomfortable or politically charged. We see that danger now in the current turmoil at the CDC. We call on the American people to recognize the stakes. The CDC’s work is foundational to our health security, and without a stable, expert-led agency, we are vulnerable.

We urge all Americans to contact their elected representatives and demand that they prioritize the stability and competence of the CDC."

Even the World Health Organization says US CDC needs to be protected. 

I'm still thinking about what the best strategy is to protect public health as I revisit all the federal .gov health information sources links we have. Some are fine, some are gone, some are looking rather questionable. 

Protect Public Health

I keep meaning to blog over the weekends but can't keep up with the magnitude of things spiraling since the August 8 assault was an attack on CDC and on violence prevention, so here's yesterday alone since the article headlines say it all and present a range of perspectives within them.

As a medical librarian, I'm revisiting our Code of Ethics that hasn't been updated for 15 years (seriously?) and thinking we need to have some conversations about that. Can we in good faith still promote US government-produced health resources as the "best available information"? 

Potential action item: Read then Sign the Letter - Save HHS

Yesterday (August 28)- 

• CDC Director Susan Monarez fired weeks after being sworn in (AllSides)
• CDC's leadership is in chaos - Experts warn of public health risks (Scientific American)
• Kennedy's attack on public health must be stopped (American Public Health Association)